Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: thames_sider who wrote (38260)	11/22/2001 11:22:22 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Then most of us do not qualify as jingoists. Bill, for example, was against intervention in Kosovo. I was dubious, as was JLA, but gave it qualified support. Christopher was also against the Kosovo intervention. Both JLA and I were dubious about intervention in Haiti. Charley is practically an isolationist, except in relation to a direct attack on the United States. I could go on, but what is the point......

To: thames_sider who wrote (38260)	11/22/2001 11:40:47 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 82486

I think the term "jingoist" fits well. It captures not just the fervent, even zealous, support, but also the attitude that the military is the epitome of the nation, that an activist military strategy is always right and must always be supported, whatever it is (and the confidence that military adventure will always be won). I can't buy jingoism. Chauvinism would be a good choice, though. Chauvinism captures the blind, fervent support I was getting at but omits the military spin. I think that the inclination toward war is a different question. True, the populations of flag-waverschauvinists/uncomplicated patriots and the jingoists overlap a lot, but the roots I find different enough to analyze separately. Militarism is an application of chauvinism. IMO. Karen

To: thames_sider who wrote (38260)	11/22/2001 1:29:58 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Do you also apply those principles in your approach toward the various factions in Ireland? Do you, for example, think that an English patriot can see that the English are responsible for the IRA bombings in London and elsewhere in England and should understand those as legitimate expressions of grievances, and that a true English patriot can support those bombings as appropriate exercises of valid outrage? It's a lot easier to take such objective positions from far away.